Paudge Connolly (Cavan-Monaghan, Independent)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue. The Social Welfare Bill 2006 gives effect to the social welfare changes announced in last week's Budget Statement. Reading through the budget, there were signs that the Minister listened to representations made in the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs. I spent some time on that committee and I must say that I enjoyed it. I regretted leaving it, because we were dealing with real life issues on an ongoing basis. In contrast to some of my contributions on Social Welfare Bills in recent years, I must concede that the social welfare package was one of the more welcome aspects of this year's budget. Few people realise that the Department of Social and Family Affairs is the biggest spending Department and it was heartening to see Fr. Seán Healy welcome the budget's provisions in this area. However, many people depend on social welfare and it is our job to find weaknesses in the budget.

Social welfare changes are normally calculated to ease the pain and make life a little more bearable for the most socially deprived people in our society. The question is how they measure up in the task of bridging the poverty gap between the most disadvantaged and the most privileged. It has been acknowledged that the gap has widened because of the 1% cut in the higher level of income tax, which for the most part benefits the better off. This includes Members of the House and people on a reasonably comfortable salary. It is ironic that we are giving out about such a decrease in the tax take. We also note that the increased non-contributory old age pension, which has hit the €200 barrier for the first time and which raised a chorus of war-whoops from the Government benches, is still €3.50 below the poverty line. We should acknowledge that and not jump out of our skins. Is it fair that pensions are linked to the poverty gap? The contributory old age pension, at €209.30, is just €6 above the poverty level, and clearly shows that we have a long way to go to eradicate poverty.

One yardstick by which to measure both the ongoing and the cumulative effects of successive budgets on the lives of the poor is the list of figures quoted by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. Calls to the society have quadrupled over the past three years, and it needs to spend over €750,000 each week to relieve both poverty and social exclusion. It is ironic that calls have quadrupled during a period in which three of our better social welfare budgets have been introduced. There are many people out there whose pride will not allow them to call the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. These people would rather keep the struggle indoors than hurt their pride, so I am not sure whether we are getting the full picture of what is happening out there. Older people often want to keep a few euro for their funeral and for the relatives who have looked after them. This fear of dying in poverty is in the psyche and some people will not spend money on themselves, no matter what is given to them. People want to keep that little bit of their €200 in reserve because they are afraid of the rainy day.

The annual spend by the Society of St. Vincent de Paul of more than €39 million dampens the Celtic tiger's roar, and many of those who found it necessary to contact the society for help were in poorly paid jobs. Their low levels of income rendered them ineligible to qualify for any social welfare benefits.

Pensioners have been playing catch-up over the past three budgets from a very low base, and it is disturbing to note that our old age pension is still bottom of the EU heap, fifth from bottom of the OECD countries. To bring old age pensions up to an acceptable European level, they would need to be increased by at least €50 to take them clear of the poverty threshold. However, their increases will also come under severe pressure from increases in electricity, gas and medical bills, or merely trying to stay warm. They pay the same price as the rest of us for gas, electricity and even bread, but if gas goes up by 33%, it eats much more into their income. Inevitably, these problems hit in the middle of winter when people are more likely to suffer from hypothermia. We have been told for the past two or three years that the country has been awash with cash, so it is mystifying to consider why pensions and State payments have not been adjusted to a more realistic level before now.

A key group likely to be caught in poverty traps is that of lone parents, whose child dependant allowance, targeted at children in poverty, has not increased in 12 years. Overall, the social welfare package is to be given a guarded welcome, but to state that it completely tackles the issue of poverty is somewhat wide of the mark. We must admit that a bit has been done, while the Government must admit that there is much more to do.

A couple of years ago, the ESRI stated that any dent in the relative income poverty levels in this country would require a 9% rise in income tax. That would not be welcome in many quarters. Although we have high employment and average income has risen dramatically in recent years, the number falling below 50% of the average income is still well above the EU average. The ESRI stated that a successful anti-poverty policy would need improved education, greater employment opportunities and better income support. Many teenagers are leaving school without sitting their leaving certificate examinations. One must be educated to get into the skilled labour force. The onus is on us as a society to ensure that happens. There are many well educated people in Europe and we could be displaced if education is not kept to the fore. The budget could have made a more targeted approach to help those in need, particularly families on social welfare and those in lower paid employment.

Childhood food poverty needs to be tackled, particularly in the area of inequality. Food and poverty are intrinsically linked and we know that families on low incomes have low consumption levels of fresh fruit and vegetables. Fruit is often seen as a treat for these people. They also tend to consume more foods that are high in fat, salt and sugar, putting them at risk of a poor diet, with children being the most vulnerable. Parents, however, are not to blame, since diets are strongly influenced by people's social and environmental circumstances. Low income is a major factor in this mix. Parents play a key role in providing for their children's diet, and it is important they are supported through social welfare initiatives that would improve availability and access to healthy and affordable food. There is a growing awareness of food poverty as a structural constraint of food consumption and dietary intake, particularly among low income groups. Food poverty has multi-faceted consequences for health, education and social partnership, and there is considerable scope for the Government to eradicate it.

The commitment to end homelessness by 2010 sounds like a pipe-dream. It is somewhat reminiscent of the boast by the Soviet Union that it had abolished poverty when people were begging for bread outside Russian Orthodox churches. I must mention to the next homeless person I meet that he or she has only another four years to go before the problems are sorted out. The €20 increase in social welfare rates is to be welcomed, but it provides cold comfort for those on the streets without a roof over their heads. The attitude prevails that they are victims of their own circumstances, but I do not believe that, rather they are victims of society's circumstances and we have to take it on ourselves to sort this out. Their Christmas will be spent trying to ensure they have hostel accommodation.

The measures announced for family carers in the home, while welcome, will only deliver for them a modicum of support and certainly do not go far enough to have real impact. There are 150,000 family carers in the country and the increase in allowance will provide a degree of support for them. Ireland's family carers provided over 3.5 million hours in unpaid care every week. They are the unsung heroes and heroines of family care. I come across the fraught situation on a regular basis where old people are expected to look after even older people and not enough recognition is being given to them.

See this speech in context